I don't like DHCP for servers, because in an emergency, there is the
potential for the wrong thing to happen and servers not come up in a timely
fashion.

Given the infrequency of IP changes on servers, I'm fine with a manual
configuration.

Having a rogue DHCP device wreak havoc with workstations is never as
problematic as with servers.

-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker


On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Sean Martin <[email protected]> wrote:

> This brings up an interesting discussion topic, for which I haven't found
> much information.
>
> What are some of the pros/cons of using DHCP for servers (other than what
> has already been stated)? We currently maintain reserved addresses in DHCP
> for all of our clients/printers etc (and would definiltey do so for
> servers). Extending that same management methodology wouldn't be much of a
> learning curve for most of our folks. As I said before, I think the idea
> behind using static addresses is simply because "that's how we've always
> done it". I've heard mention of not using DHCP to prevent DHCP broadcasts
> but with a properly designed lease interval, I can't imagine the DHCP
> traffic being that much of burden on today's networks....
>
> - Sean
>
> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Malcolm Reitz <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>  There are places that prefer not to enable DHCP on server subnets for
>> security reasons. Also, managing DHCP reservations will be a non-trivial
>> operational workload in a dynamic data center.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Malcolm
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 18, 2010 11:52
>>
>> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
>> *Subject:* Re: Scripting IP Changes on remote devices
>>
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> If you are going to do the work of manually configuring specific IP
>> addresses, why not do it in a way that is centrally manageable?
>>
>> Although you did say servers...   I would still go with DHCP possible.
>>
>> --
>> ME2
>>
>>  On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Jonathan Link <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Any reason to have static?  Consider DHCP with reservations so this
>> kind of transition could be managed centrally in the future?  As long
>> as your rolling out the script you could have it switch from static to
>> dynic and be done.  Of course all this is predicated on not having a
>> major reasons to be static.
>>
>> On Friday, May 14, 2010, Brian Desmond <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > This is fairly easy to do with WMI. You just want to iterate through the
>> IPEnabled adapters collection and there are methods to stamp WINS and DNS
>> servers. I’d suggest inspecting the current settings and using that data to
>> decide whether you stamp or not. WINS is a simple primary/secondary stamp,
>> DNS is a collection you need to clear and populate.  Thanks,Brian
>> [email protected] c   – 312.731.3132 From: Sean Martin
>> [mailto:[email protected]]
>>
>> > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 2:43 PM
>> > To: NT System Admin Issues
>> > Subject: Scripting IP Changes on remote devices Good Morning/Afternoon,
>>  I'm looking for a little assistance with automating IP changes on several
>> hundred servers. The vast majority will be Windows 2003 but there may be
>> some Windows 2000 boxes mixed in there. I'm going to need to change the DNS
>> and WINS IP addresses on our servers with static assignments. I'm thinking
>> VB would be the best language to use, unfortunately I'm not real strong with
>> VB so I was hoping someone might have some already written code I could
>> manipulate (certainly not asking anyone to write anything for me!). The main
>> problem is that I can't rely on any continuity amongst the servers. Meaning,
>> the interface names may not be the same (LAN Connection X), and some servers
>> may have multiple NICs for which I only need to modify one.  I was hoping it
>> would be possible to query the current configuration of the NICs and
>> identify ones with DNS IP 1 = X and then modify those to DNS IP 1 = Y. I'd
>> like to do this for the primary and secondary DNS and WINs references. Any
>> pointers at all would be much appreciated. - Sean
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to